UPHOLD DEMOCRACY! UPHOLD STUDENT RIGHTS!

UPHOLD DEMOCRACY!

UPHOLD STUDENT RIGHTS!

Pangkat Lingkod Bayan

^{Official Statement}

^{January 23, 2009}

We are about to make a history. This is just the start of the challenge given to us as Iskolars ng Bayan. We have to accept it. But the biggest question is: What do we like to happen next?

Before going into it, PALABAN would like to mention and explain the following:

1. 
   

   Student Regent. The Student Regent is the only representative of the students to the highest policy-making body of the university, the Board of Regents (BOR). His/Her role is very important because it is only through the SR that we can address our issues and concerns to the BOR. S/he has the same powers and duties with the rest of the ten (10) regents of the board which includes:

(f) To approve the rules on student discipline recommended by the University Councils through the President of the University, with the Board retaining the power to review and pass final judgment on student disciplinary cases;

(i) To provide fellowships, scholarships and grants, including athletic grants and to award the same to faculty, staff and students having special evidence of merit, especially those who are poor and deserving students;

(j) To elect the President of the University for a single term of six (6) years following a process of democratic consultation with the university community based on standards and guidelines set by the Board. In the event of a vacancy, the Board shall elect a president who shall serve a full term. A Chancellor chosen by the Board may act as Officer-in-Charge of the national university when the search process is in progress. In no case shall the search and election of the next President be loner than ninety (90) days from the date when the vacancy occurs;

(m) To fix the tuition fees and other necessary school charges, as the Board may deem proper impose, after due and comprehensive consultation with students concerned. Such fees and charges, including government support and other income generated by the national university shall constitute special trust funds and shall be deposited in an authorized government depository bank. Any and all interest that shall accrue therefrom shall form part of the same funds for the use of the national university.

2. 
   

   Codified Rules on Student Regent Selection (CRSRS). The CRSRS contains the guiding rules of the students on how to select the next student regent. It is also stated that:

Section 12 The Board of Regents. (g) One Student Regent, to serve for a term of one (1) year, chosen by the students from their ranks in accordance with rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students;

3. 
   

   The Referendum. The referendum, as mandated in the provisions to ratify the CRSRS, is a question of legitimacy. The UP Charter mandates the CRSRS to be approved in a referendum by the students. A 50 percent plus one Vote manifests a successful referendum. It is a failure if the contrary occurs and if the percentage of voter turnout does not reach the 50 percent plus one.

A YES Vote means. . .

A YES Vote means you agree with the provisions that are stated in the CRSRS. If the affirmation of the CRSRS reaches the 50 percent plus one, we shall then proceed to the selection of the next Student Regent.

A NO Vote means. . .

A No Vote manifests that you are not in favor of the CRSRS (or some of its provision/s) to be the rules in selecting the next Student Regent. This will make the incumbent Student Regent Shahana Abdulwahid stay in her position until such time that a replacement is selected.

If the referendum fails . . .

As what was mentioned above, the referendum has two ways to fail. We also mentioned that the incumbent will remain in office until such time that a new student regent is selected. For everyone’s information, the legal term of the incumbent regent ended when 2008 ended. Her term was extended because of the conduct of this referendum and to wait for the next regent. However, the incumbent regent is graduating this April. The CRSRS has been upholding the rule that a non-UP student [enrolled] cannot be a Student Regent. Thus, at the time that Regent Abdulwahid graduates, she cannot anymore serve as a regent. Here is where the predicament comes in if such will happen. Who will be our regent after? We cannot select a new student regent because we need the CRSRS ratified by the majority of the students before we select the next SR.

Everything about the selection of the next SR will be uncertain if a NO Vote prevails. What is certain about the implication of a NO Vote is that: NO RULES FOR THE SR SELECTION until the NEXT REFERENDUM. We should not wait for the next referendum. Here is our opportunity to protect and assure of our representation to the BOR. What is also threatening here is that the incumbent SR’s legal term was over. Because of the deferment of her term, her presence in the BOR and legitimacy as a regent may be questioned by the other regents. Because of the deferment of her term, her decisions may not be tantamount with the other regents. Anytime, she can be kicked out of the BOR. When this happens, vacancy is great possible. We shall not be definite of the period, but this will be one of the consequences when the incumbent can no longer serve as a SR and still, CRSRS is not ratified. We cannot tolerate vacancy because this will make the office and the students vulnerable to prejudices and abuses by the people in power. When such event occurred, since a SR is mandated in the UP Charter, there will be a possibility that the BOR will do something about this just to shun the absence of a SR. If we trace the history of the OSR, there were time/s that the BOR and the President of the Philippines denied the regent selected by the students, and appoint their own student regent to the BOR.

Are there people campaigning for a NO?

Yes. There are organizations campaigning for a NO. A NO Vote would manifest that you do not agree of the CRSRS (or its provision/s) and strongly proves that there is a need for the amendments. However, it is stated in the existing CRSRS that submission of amendments is on or before October 1 every year. The organizers of the NO-campaign presented and insisted their amendments on the General Assembly of the Student Councils (GASC) last December. Because it was submitted late, it was not deliberated further. The majority of GASC decided to have the referendum with a question: "Do you approve of the existing Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS) as rules and qualifications to govern the selection of our student representative to the UP Board of Regents? YES or NO.” The opposing organizations passed a manifesto to the OSR submitted last January 9 but were junked a week after (January 16) for the reason that the majority of the SC opposes the amendments. Only 13 out of 51 student councils (and six student leaders signed the manifesto in their personal capacity) in the entire UP system stipulated for the inclusion of the proposed amendments to the final question. “They are a minority. I would be questioned if I accommodate their demand.”- SR Abdulwahid. Yes, indeed that the SR will be biased if she goes for the minority decision when the majority says the contrary.

Definitely, a YES Vote does not close doors to amendments because the CRSRS mandated for the submission of amendments by the student council every year. And to those who want to amend the CRSRS, haven’t they thought that their amendments may not be tackled or touched if the referendum will fail? Only the CRSRS has the rules on how to amend such CRSRS. The rules regarding these things are included in the CRSRS, thus saying NO to CRSRS will cause again uncertainty for amendments.

What is the best thing to do?

This referendum, as we said, is a question of legitimacy. At this point in time, we do not want to end like those stated above – vacancy in the OSR, uncertainties on the amendments, and an appointed SR. The weapon for protecting out rights is her. The affirmation of the CRSRS will give us the assurance of having a new SR, and at the same time, would give other people the opportunity to submit their respective amendments.

A YES assures us to protecting our rights.

A YES assures us to have a SR!

A YES assures us of a democratic representation to the BOR.

YES to CRSRS!

DEFEND THE OFFICE OF THE STUDENT REGENT!

MABUHAY KA, ISKOLAR NG BAYAN!

UP Students May Lose Representation in Highest Governing Body

Additional requirements for the selection of the student representative to the Board of Regents – as stipulated in the new UP Charter- have endangered the representation of students in the highest policy-making body of the country’s premier state university.

By Ronalyn V. Olea
Bulatlat

Since 1987, a lone student representative sits as an official member of the University of the Philippines’ (UP) Board of Regents (BOR). From that year until 1997, the Katipunan ng mga Sangguniang Mag-aaral sa UP (Kasama sa UP or Association of Student Councils in UP), a system-wide alliance of UP student councils, selects the Student Regent from among themselves. In 1997, the General Assembly of Student Councils (GASC) formulated and approved the Codified Rules for the Student Regent Selection (CRSRS). For more than a decade, the CRSRS was used as a guideline in the selection of the SR.

In April 2008, the Republic Act 9500 or the UP Charter was enacted. Section 12 letter g of the Charter states: “One Student Regent, to serve for a term of one (1) year, chosen by the students from their ranks in accordance with rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students.”

The referendum for the approval of the CRSRS has been set from January 26 to 31 of this year.
In an interview with the Philippine Collegian, Theodore Te, UP Vice President for Legal Affairs said that for the referendum to take effect, a voter turnout of 50 percent plus one of all bonafide UP students must be reached.

Logistical nightmare

In an interview with Bulatlat, Student Regent Shahana Abdulwahid said Te did not cite any basis for his proposed 50 percent plus one formula. She said that voter turnout for UP student council elections ranges only from 30 to 40 percent. Thus, she said, reaching the required percentage of voter turnout for a referendum to take effect - even before a Student Regent could be selected - would be very difficult.

Besides, she said, the referendum is a ‘logistical nightmare.’

She said that not all of the 55,00 students in the entire UP system know the existence of the SR. “How would you encourage them to vote in the referendum? They must first understand the relevance of having a student representative in the BOR.”

Abdulwahid said that a failure of the referendum is tantamount to losing the lone student representative to the BOR. “There would be no rules to start with,” she said.

Abdulwahid’s term should have ended in December last year. She has been compelled to hold over until a new SR has been selected.

She said further, “In a way, [the referendum] challenges the present rules [governing the selection of SR).”

Abdulwahid said the referendum places the Office of the Student Regent (OSR) in a disadvantageous position.

Proposed amendments

Abdulwahid related that the proposal for a referendum came from one student leader in UP Manila. She refused to name the proponent. She said that before the enactment of the UP Charter, they opposed the inclusion of that particular provision.

Abdulwahid revealed that ‘pseudo-progressive student organizations’ in UP have been proposing amendments to the CRSRS but were rejected by the General Assembly of Student Councils (GASC). She said the same groups wanted to include their proposed amendments to the questions to be submitted in the referendum. She said that these groups see the referendum as an opportunity to push for their amendments.

Among the proposed amendments include the additional academic requirement for SR; deletion of Kasama sa UP; and some proposed changes in the voting mechanism.

“If their proposed amendments have merit, why are these being rejected? The proponents could not prove that such amendments are needed,” Abdulwahid said.

Abdulwahid said she has been accused of being partisan because of her affiliation with STAND UP, a political party in UP. She said however that only six out of 51 student councils in the entire UP system demanded for the inclusion of the proposed amendments to the final questions. “They are a minority. I would be questioned if I accommodate their demand.”

Historical victory

She said the OSR is a product of the long struggle of students for student representation. “As the biggest constituency in the university, the students need to have a voice in the implementation of policies affecting them.”

In an article, JPaul Manzanilla, former UP Student Regent and former chairperson of the University Student Council (USC) in UP Diliman, said that from 1908 to 1968, university policies are determined without the student population’s full knowledge. It was only in 1969 that a “student observer” had been allowed to observe the proceedings of the BOR. From 1970 until 1972, then President Ferdinand Marcos appointed the student council chairpersons as regular members of the BOR concurrent with their student council tenure.

Manzanilla’s article stated that in the early 80s, the Kasama sa UP campaigned for the reinstatement of the position of the student regent. The alliance rejected Marcos’ hand in the appointment of the student regent and demanded that the SR must be selected by the students themselves.

In 1987, then President Corazon Aquino issued Executive Order No. 204 modifying the composition of the BOR to include one student representative.

In another interview, Alvin Peters, national president of the National Union of Students of the Philippines (NUSP), the biggest alliance of student councils in the country, said the school administration must not intervene in the selection of the SR.

Peters deemed that the requirement for a referendum is an imposition provided for in the UP Charter. He said it is a threat to the student movement.

Implications

The NUSP leader said the referendum would have serious implications to the gains of the student movement.

Peters said that other state universities and colleges (SUCs) may also opt for a referendum, thereby undermining the existing rules in the selection of student representatives in highest policy-making bodies of universities. “The UP referendum may be used as a pretext to intervene in the existing mechanism of students to choose their own representatives,” he explained.

Peters said the historical context of student representation in state universities’ highest policy making bodies must be taken into account. “It is a product of a long struggle by progressive student leaders. It is part of the historic struggle of students for democratic reforms.”
Peters challenged the UP students to defend their right to representation. He said the existing rules must be upheld as a reaffirmation of the historic victory of students.(Bulatlat.com)

*Note: Please disregard the default byline of this blog. Thanks.

Source:
http://bulatlat.com/main/2009/01/19/up-students-may-lose-representation-in-highest-governing-body/

You are summoned!

“Crisis is the time that the nation calls for the youth to move and be militant.”

Centennial era had ended but our story still continues. If we try to scan on the previous pages, we will see that a lot of things remain unfold. The year 2007 was the approval of the BOR of the 300% increase in tuition fee and speculations were heard that tuition will continue to increase annually base on inflation rate (and was said by UP President Emerlinda Roman on a TV Program). On April 2008, RA 9500 or the UP Charter was signed and approved by President Gloria Arroyo. Just this December, the General Assembly of Student Councils (GASC) was conducted to review the Codified Rules on Student Regent Selection (CRSRS). To comply with what RA 9500 stated in one of its provisions (Section 1 [g] One Student Regent, to serve for a term of one (1) year, chosen by the students from their ranks in accordance with rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students) the CRSRS will be into a referendum by the students. Such rules will be used on the selection of the next Student Regent, if and only if 50%+1 of the students of the whole UP System will vote a “YES”. If this fails, incumbent SR Shahana Abdulwahid will remain in office until a replacement is selected and another referendum is successful.

Why do we vote YES to CRSRS if either saying YES or NO will still end up with a Student Regent? Since the term of the SR had overdue already (SR Abdulwahid’s term ended when 2008 ended), the existing CRSRS must be ratified by the students for us to select the next Student Regent. The presence of a student regent in the BOR is mandated in the new charter. In case this referendum will not be successful, there will be no guidelines on how to select the next SR. I said awhile ago that the incumbent will remain in position until such time that a replacement is selected. But the thing here is our SR is graduating this April in her MA. We know that a non-student cannot be a Student Regent, like what had happened in the late 1990’s where a SR was kicked out of the BOR because he was on LOA. Thus, SR Shahana cannot anymore extend in her office after her graduation. This is where predicament comes. The BOR will not allow the absence of a member of the board. Thus, if this referendum fails, the BOR will find ways and means to have a SR. If this referendum fails, there will be no guide for the selection of the next SR. If this referendum fails, we shall again wait for a new referendum. Think of this. Do you think that we can do this right away? February or even March will not be enough, especially that there are already manifesto of appeals for the amendments on some of the CRSRS provisions. We should not wait for another referendum. Why are we saying this? We said the incumbent SR’s term is over. This is the menace. Anytime, the BOR can question the SR’s legitimacy as a SR. Anytime, the BOR can nullify the SR because of her deferment in office. We should not tolerate a ‘Student Regent-less’ epoch because this will make the OSR vulnerable to abuses and prejudices from political powers.

We say YES to CRSRS because we need to secure our very sole representation to the Board of Regents! We say YES to CRSRS because it is only through the SR that our issues and concerns as students are being carried to the BOR. We say DEFEND THE OSRwe are threaten to have a 'Student Regent-less' epoch again because . A YES vote is the most prudent way to answer these dilemmas.

CM! You are summoned now! This is our weapon to protect our rights as students!

DEFEND THE OSR!

YES FOR A SR!

YES TO CRSRS!

MABUHAY ISKOLAR NG BAYAN!

Official Statement

League of Filipino Students

UPV Iloilo City Chapter

January19, 2009

Their Myth of "Democracy" and "Misinformation"

As we move further into the historic week of the SR Referendum, in pursuance of the anti-democratic UP Charter provision requiring such, the Iskolars ng Bayan are bombarded with leaflets-upon-leaflets of positions by different student groups on the validity of their respective causes.

We need to do some fact-checks for a better understanding of the matter.

"We are merely for democracy, giving the students the opportunity to decide for themselves the conduct of the referendum and the substance of the matter to be decided upon."

In the history of the world, the word democracy has been used and abused by political groups with a clear political agenda. They use the democratic label to ultimately smokescreen their conservative and anti-people politics, to create a pseudo-progressive persona that serves as a supposed alternative to prevailing democratic institutions of the day. Yellow and reactionary trade unions call themselves "free", "independent" , "democratic" , "alternative" to create false impressions that the leading militant trade unions exist otherwise, albeit in a dogmatic, absolutely radical manner. But in the course of the existence of these "free and democratic" trade unions, they have exposed themselves as mere false gods of a misplaced understanding of democracy, by participating in acts and policy initiatives with the state that have effectively constricted the already limited rights of workers in the factories and countryside.

Today, democracy is again hoisted upon the heads of the Iskolars ng Bayan to make them believe that the students themselves are being pushed against the wall by an utterly undemocratic Student Regent and its minions for being unrelenting in opposing the appeals by a minority of student councils to change the referendum question and include their own proposals.
Their actions, at best, are the acts of desperate political groups who remain unyielding in defense of their already bankrupt positions on specific matters in the current CRSRS. Time and time again, their proposals have been rejected by a majority of student councils in the UP System through the GASC (General Assembly of Student Councils), a most effective democratic institution now created by statute.

They approach the students with the myth of a genuinely democratic SR Referendum by including their proposals, when in fact, batches upon batches of student leaders through the years and across the UP System have consistently rejected their proposals. To insinuate that there is greater democracy in subjecting questions directly to the electorate whilst forgetting the historic and democratic rejection of their proposals shows how clear the discourse on democracy is being peddled with great malice and vested interests. A consistent historic and democratic rejection by student leaders of their proposals is as democratic as subjecting the SR Referendum rules to a vote, and it is this historic rejection that we are submitting to the Iskolars ng Bayan for overwhelming affirmation today, to conclusively determine if indeed such a historic rejection is consistent with the aspirations of the present student body and not only by their duly elected representatives.

To force the Office of the Student Regent to include their proposals in the ballot is to invalidate the existence of the current CRSRS as a genuinely democratic document, to be subjected to the approval of the greatest democratic body, the students themselves. By insisting on their self-made myth of democracy, it is they that are clearly being undemocratic, by their obstinate refusal to respect decisions made by student leaders through a most democratic body, the GASC.

"Stop the misinformation, the Office of the Student Regent remains despite a failed referendum."

There is no debate that the Office of the Student Regent remains despite a failed referendum. But what we are clearly fearful of in such an eventuality is not the non-existence of an Office but the absence of a Student Regent to represent the Iskolars ng Bayan during the monthly Board of Regents meeting. The UP Administration can assure us all they want that Regent Abdulwahid shall continuously be recognized, but in the eventuality that she does vacate the Office due to whatever contingency such as her imminent graduation, among others, it is clear that there shall be no mechanism by which the next Student Regent can be chosen for as long as no referendum to approve the rules is validly approved by the students.

The greatest danger in such a situation is not the possibility of a Malacanang-appointed Regent, but the spectre of anti-student policy approvals by the UP Administration through the Board of Regents without representation or objection from our highest student institution. In the course of the weeks that passed, reports on a new round of tuition increases are spreading like wildfire, as provided by the statement of the UP President herself during an interview on cable television. In UP Manila, the next round of tuition increases in the UP College of Medicine are underway, using the same excuses as the tuition increases of 2006 but now pegging UP College of Medicine tuition at its actual market rate, thereby obliterating the promise of a more democratic medical institution by encouraging underprivileged students to enter the medical school through low tuition.

These are but mere examples of concrete anti-student policy initiatives in the coming months that shall come to pass in the event of a failed referendum, and the eventual absence of a sitting Student Regent. Whilst the student councils in the thick of the campaign to ensure the triumph of the referendum will vigorously campaign against these proposals in such an eventuality, the militant yet principled presence of the Student Regent in the Board of Regents is the most concrete manifestation of such an opposition to these measures.

The test of democracy and its unrelenting pursuance is not merely the physical act of providing venues by which the greatest number of persons may participate in the creation of policy, but also, whether rights of already underprivileged sectors are expanded and realized through the exercise of democratic processes and the establishment of democratic institutions.

The curtailment of democratic rights in the event of a delay in the selection of a Student Regent is an important facet of the democratic ideal that oppositors of the SR Referendum fail to recognize. However, such an understanding is clearly not expected because it is these student groups themselves that have been flip-flopping on countless student issues, particularly their flimsy and opportunist position on tuition and other fee increases, where they oppose tuition increases during election season whilst acknowledging the need for tuition increase/adjustments under certain conditions in official statements and congressional hearings.

It is in the pursuit of such an understanding of democracy that the Office of the Student Regent is vigorously fighting for the success of the SR Referendum, no other.

In the ultimate analysis, the students are faced with two roads to choose today. One road is the "democratic" road, where the reality of their conservative, traditional and reactionary politics abounds amid the smoke of their sugarcoated and simplified understanding of democracy, where they force their positions no matter what, despite historic rejections by democratic bodies, notwithstanding their willingness to subject the selection of the Student Regent to an unreasonable delay in curtailment of our right to representation in the Board of Regents. This is a journey into the woods, with no clear destination towards protecting our rights, other than securing points for their own vested interests.

The other road is one that is created and built by the laborious and historic struggle of Iskolars ng Bayan past and present, with the clear direction and destination of bringing us closer to the realization of our rights by ensuring the unhampered functioning of the Office of the Student Regent through the triumph of the SR Referendum and the immediate selection of a new Student Regent.

In all of these, there is no doubt which road is truly most democratic and representative of the true interests, hopes and aspirations of the Iskolars ng Bayan.

-League of Filipino Students, UP Diliman

http://vvillanueva.multiply.com/journal/item/26/Their_Myth_of_Democracy_and_Misinformation

Disregard the byline. Thanks.

Defend Student Rights, Defend the Office of the Student Regent

The centennial year has just ended and a new era has dawned. But while the university's first century comes to a close, the forging of history continues. Indeed, the times still beckon our generation to become the new agents of history, just as past generations of students did.

For us, the year 2009 heralds two possibilities – the onslaught of policies and measures that pose a threat to our democratic rights, as well as the renewed commitment to defend them. In the newly-approved UP Charter, for instance, there are various provisions that imperil our hard-won liberties, constituting an attack on democratic access to education and student representation.

The UP Charter subjects the Office of the Student Regent (OSR) to a trial that is not only unnecessary but also unjustified. The OSR is the sole representation of the students to the Board of Regents (BOR), as mandated by Cory Aquino in Executive Order No. 204. Before the order was approved, the student representation was only limited to observer status, and therefore did not have any right to partake in any decision-making in the Board of Regents, the highest policy-making body of the university.

The selection of the Student Regent (SR) traditionally follows the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS) approved yearly by the General Assembly of Student Councils (GASC). Both the OSR and the CRSRS were secured and crafted by the students directly following Martial Law, after a tireless clamoring for fair representation. Today, the OSR and the CRSRS are a concrete manifestation of the students' collective accomplishment.

In its two decades of existence, the OSR has been an instrument in defending the interests of the students and the wider sectors in society. It has spearheaded campaigns for higher state subsidy, fought against discrimination, and continually pushed for the accessibility of quality education in the university. Its inauguration also realigned UP's direction towards the upholding of the democratic interests of the people. And though there have been efforts to drown the OSR's voice – and in effect, the mandate of the students – the SR persevered, bolstered by the support of the youth.

Despite the pro-student character of the OSR and the CRSRS, the UP Charter still submits it to a referendum, exposing the OSR to a possible vacancy or suspension. The referendum will be held for six days, from January 26 to 31. The UP Charter warrants the most number of affirmative votes from all students systemwide for the SR selection to proceed.

The UP Charter is also unclear on the event of a failed referendum, placing the OSR at the juncture of uncertainty. The outcome of this ambiguity, however, is sure danger for student rights, as the lack of representation will leave us vulnerable to intensified forms of intervention from the state and the administration.

This is a very crucial time for us students as there are increasing concerns that put our democratic rights and interests at risk. In a period of crisis and hardship for the Filipino people, the UP administration opts to compromise the accessibility of education to the broader public. It has only been two years since the implementation of the 300 percent Tuition and other Fee Increases (TOFI), yet the administration is possibly already preparing for another round of TOFI in the next three years, as confirmed by UP Pres. Emerlinda Roman in a television interview.

Meanwhile, the students can barely keep up with the rising costs. This semester, student loans in UP Diliman alone escalated to more than 100 percent from last school year, with the most number of loans borrowed by students from Bracket C of the Socialized Tuition and Other Fees Program (STFAP).

If anything, this onslaught confirms the importance of student representation, and the instrumentality of the SR in defending our rights against the machinations of the administration and the state. Therefore, we shall declare our loud and piercing support for the OSR by casting our YES votes on the impending referendum.

For we shall not stand in silence while our rights are attacked, and our legitimate concerns are ignored. Together, let us defend the institution which our forbearers have fought hard for. We shall vote YES to the CRSRS referendum to secure our sole representation and to protect the future of the university and the next generation. In unity, let's ensure our position as the largest stakeholders of the university with a resonating YES vote in the referendum!

http://vvillanueva.multiply.com/journal/item/25/Defend_Student_Rights_Defend_the_Office_of_the_Student_Regent

*Disregard the byline. Thank you.

5 Simple Points: Bakit kailangang ipagtanggol ang OSR?

1. Ano ba ang Office of the Student Regent, at bakit ito kailangan ipagtanggol?

Ang Student Regent, o SR, ang tanging representative nating mga estudyante sa Board of Regents, ang highest policy-making body ng buong UP System. Kung icocompare natin sa gobyerno, ang UP Admin ang "executive branch" (i.e si GMA), habang ang BOR ang Kongreso at Senado.

Kadalasan, tanging ang SR lang ang maaasahan na dalhin sa mga BOR Meetings ang mga student concerns at issues. Minsan nga, tanging ang SR rin lang ang boboto sa panig ng mga estudyante. Halimbawa, nung kainitan ng pagtutulak ng 300% TOFI noong 2006, si dating SR Raffy Sanchez ang walang humpay na nakipag-negosasyon sa ilan sa mga ibang Regents para hindi aprubahan ang TOFI (hindi rin nagtagumpay dahil hindi na rin pinapasok si Sanchez at ang dating Faculty Regent noon para bumoto).

2. Mula kanino kailangang ipagtanggol ang OSR?

Mula sa intervention, o pakikialam, ng UP Administration. Mula rin sa outside intervention, o pakikialam ng mga indibidwal, grupo, at interes, sa labas ng Unibersidad.

Sa mga pagkakataon na nagbabanggaan ang interes ng mga estudyante at ng UP Admin/National Admin (at ito ay madalas mangyari), ang SR ay nagiging malaking headache para sa kanila. Sa kasaysayan ng UP, 2 beses ng nagkaroon ng intervention sa OSR.

Ang una ay noong 1991, nung hindi inappoint ni UP President Jose Abueva ang napili ng mga estudyante bilang SR na si Jose Ilagan. Bagkus, inappoint niya ang pro-Admin na si Angelo Jimenez.Ang pangalawang pagkakataon ay noong 1999, kung saan hinarang ang pag-appoint sa hinalala na SR na si Ferdinand Zafranco.

3. Paano inaatake ang OSR?

Mula ng itatag ang OSR noong panahon ng Martial Law, ang SR ay hinahalal ng isang General Assembly ng mga Student Councils sa buong UP System, sa katauhan ng KASAMA sa UP hanggang 1996, at GASC mula 1997 hanggang sa kasalukuyan.

Ngunit sa bagong UP Charter, hindi kinikilala itong paraan ng pagpili sa SR. Para daw maging mas demokratiko ang proseso, pipiliin ang pamamaraan ng pagpili sa SR sa isang Referendum. Ito ang pa-inosenteng paliwanag ng UP Admin. Pero sa totoo, ito ay naglilikha ng posibilidad na hindi tayo makakapili ng SR. Dahil kung hindi aaprubahan ng mayorya ng mga estudyante ng UP (nangangahulugan na 50% + 1 ng lahat ng estudyante mula UP Baguio hanggang UP Mindanao), hindi tayo makakapili ng SR.

Malaki ang posibilidad na mangyari ito dahil ang pinaka-malaking UP unit, ang Diliman, ay parating mababa ang voters' turn-out sa mga student council elections. Malaki ang pinsala na matatamo ng Referendum kung ganito rin ang mangyayari dun.

Sa madaling salita, ang Referendum Clause sa bagong UP Charter ang sandata ng UP at National Admins para pakialaman at pilayin ang isang institusyon na nagtatanggol sa mga estudyante. Kung dati ay siguradong magkakaroon ng SR sa bawat taon, ngayon ay parating nanganganib ang pagkakaroon ng SR. Maraming paraan para hindi maabot ang boto ng "YES" ng 50% + 1.

4. Bakit urgent ang pagtanggol sa OSR ngayon?

Maraming hamon ang kinakaharap nating mga Iskolar ng Bayan. Una ay ang bagong serye ng mga Tuition and Other Fee Increase. Ito ay nilahad ni UP President Emerlinda Roman sa isang palabas sa telebisyon noong nakaraang Disyembre. Ayon sa kanya, mura pa ang kasalukuyang tuition sa UP, na P40 libo kada taon. Mura pa daw ito, kung ikukumpara sa aktwal na halaga ng ating matrikula na P50 libo kada taon.

Ngunit hindi ito mura, lalo na sa pananaw ng karaniwang Pilipino na nabubuhay sa 'di-aabot sa P56 kada araw. Sumusunod ang UP Admin sa patakaran sa edukasyon ng rehimeng Arroyo na tinutulak ang mga state colleges and universities na tuluyan ng hindi i-subsidize ang edukasyon, kasama ang matrikula.

Pangalawa ay ang tumitinding campus repression na nararanasan sa buong bansa, hindi lamang sa UP.

Pinaka-malala ang karanasan ng UPLB, kung saan na-delay ang pagkakaroon ng mga student council dahil sa intervention ng UPLB Admin. Ganun rin ang nangyari sa kanilang opisyal na pahayagan, ang Perspective. Umabot sa punto na kinukuha ng militar ang mga personal records ng mga lider-estudyante sa UPLB, habang ang ilan pa nga ay binantaan na arbitrarily ibabagsak sa kanilang mga subjects.

Sa UP Visayas at sa UP Baguio, may curfew ng 6pm sa kanilang mga campus. Sa UP Mindanao naman, labas-masok ang militar na naka-full battle gear sa kanilang Campus. Sa UP Pampanga, binantaan ang mga miyembro ng kanilang USC na ie-expel sila kung sasama sila sa mga kilos-protesta.

Dito naman sa Diliman, naglabas ang Office of Student Affairs ng isang bagong Student Handbook na walang konsultasyon sa mga estudyante. Hanggang ngayon, walang pinapakitaan ng laman nito. Nilabag naman ang matagal na kasunduan sa pagitan ng UP Admin at ng Dept. of National Defense ng nagtayo ang PNP ng ilang mga estasyon sa loob ng ating Campus. Bagama't dinadahilan na kailangan daw ng dagdag-tulong ng UPD Police, kaya naman hirap na hirap ang UPDP ay dahil sobrang baba ng budget na binibigay sa kanila. Andyan rin ang Section 464 ng bagong UP System Code, kung saan pinagbabawal ang lahat ng mga organisasyon sa UP na hindi academic-oriented.

5. MANINDIGAN PARA SA MGA KARAPATAN! OSR, IPAGLABAN!

Ang Unibersidad ng Pilipinas ay may mahabang kasaysayan at tradisyon ng militanteng pag-tanggol sa mga karapatan ng estudyante at mamamayan, ito man ay sa mga lokal o pambansang usapin.Ito ay kinakatakutan ng iilan, at hinahangaan ng sambayanan.

Kasama sa tradisyon na ito ang pakikibaka na nagbungga ng OSR. At kasama sa tagumpay ng ating mga kasalukuyang ipinaglalaban ang OSR. Kaya naman kinakailangan natin tignan na pakikibaka nating lahat ang pagpapatuloy sa OSR. Kinakailangan natin ilantad sa mas maraming bilang ng mga estudyante ang tunay na motivations sa likod ng Referendum at itakwil ang UP at National Administrations para sa kanilang pataksil na pakikialam. Paano? Sa partisipasyon natin sa kampanya para maipasa ang Referendum, mula sa simpleng pagboto ng "YES" sa Jan. 26-31, hanggang sa pagpapaliwanag sa mas maraming bilang ng mga kapwa estudyante natin.

This article was taken from:
http://redstudentswill.multiply.com/journal/item/305/5_Simple_Points_Bakit_kailangang_ipagtanggol_ang_OSR

Disregard the 'byline' above.

ISKOLAR NG BAYAN! IPAGLABAN ANG OSR! YES TO CRSRS!

Ang Board of Regents ay ang pinakamataas na policy making body ng UPSystem. Pagpili ng pangulo ng UP System hanggang sa dekano ng isangkolehiyo ay ilan lamang sa mga pinagpapasyahan ng Board of Regents.

Ang nag iisang student regent ay ang kumakatawan sa mahigit kumulang55,000 na mga-aaral ng UP System. Sa pamamagitan ng student regent aynapapahayag ang boses ng mag-aaral sa maraming desisyon at polisiya ngunibersidad, kasama na ang maiinit na isyu ng TOFI.

Ang student regent ay produkto ng pakikibaka, dugo at pawis ng mgaiskolars ng bayan para sa representasyon sa Board of Regents mula panoong panahon ni Marcos. Ang ganap na representasyon ay naibigaylamang noong 1987 pagkatapos na umupo si Pangulong Aquino at angnaging unang rehente noon ay ang ngayong senador, Kiko Pangilinan,sinundan ni David Seldran na ngayo'y isang journalist.

Ang Codified Rules on Student Regent Selection (CRSRS) ay binuo ng mgastudent councils ng buong UP System (GASC). Ang kasalukuyan nitonganyo ay resulta ng maraming taong pag aamend at pag review ng GASC.

Ngayon, dahil sa R.A. 9500, kinailangan na ito'y isalang sa isangreferendum na lalahokan ng lahat ng mga iskolars ng bayan. Kailanganng humigit kumulang 28,000 iskolars ng bayan ang bomoto pabor ditoupang ito ay kilalanin ng UP Administration na ayon sa UP Charter.Totoong mahirap at nanganganib ang kaisa isang representasyon natin saBOR pag di natin ito mapagtagumpayan.

Kaya sa darating na Enero 26-31, 2009, tayo ay bomoto ng YES sa CRSRS,dalhin lamang ang ating valid school ID o di kaya naman ay Form5 atisang valid na ID (pag walang valid na school ID).

Ipaglaban, ang Office of the Student Regent! Say YES to CRSRS.